Robert's Gospel According to the Apostle Paul

[ttruscott]

I looked up the word heresy in the dictionary. Here is what it says.

Heresy: "A belief contrary to the established doctrines of a church or religious system".

I think that it should say, "Contrary to the teachings of the Bible".

I know - that is why I mentioned. But what you think the bible teaches is only your opinion with no more authority than a Church. I do like your pov except when you accept the church blasphemies of our inherited sin from Adam as a necessary belief to explain the why of the proven fact that we all are sinners at conception or birth. It is not so necessary...

 

[Robert Pate]

The problem with this is that the word "nomou" (translated "law") already has a definition, of which there is no similarity to ANY KNOWN definition of religion.
In your mind, you equate law and religion as "basically the same thing" but that is a personal concept, not a defined, agreed on, widely accepted reality.
So what you are doing is replacing a word that has an acceptable, agreeable definition with a personal concept, which is changing the text of what was written.
Do you agree?

Those that are religious live by law. They have a law based theology which makes them religious. The Pharisees said that the law was... "The way the truth and the life" John took what they said about the law and applied it to Jesus. Even though the dictionary has a different definition for these words they are still closely related when it comes to religion. Simply because the religious live by law. When one is doing their religion they are doing the law. Anything in the Bible that tells someone to do something or not to do something is law.

 

[Robert Pate]

I know - that is why I mentioned. But what you think the bible teaches is only your opinion with no more authority than a Church. I do like your pov except when you accept the church blasphemies of our inherited sin from Adam as a necessary belief to explain the why of the proven fact that we all are sinners at conception or birth. It is not so necessary...

The Bible teaches that we are born sinners, Psalm 51:5. Also Romans 5:12. I like to go with what the Bible says.

 

[Robert Pate]

You are not making sound sense here at all, Robert.

You belong to the church invisible of all the saints. To claim that that church has no laws, whether true or not, is to state a law that states there is no law. It is inescapable. The church militant was mandated from Scripture to assemble corporately and confess the truths from the sound patterns of Scripture.

Robert, law is a system of rules that a particular community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and may enforce by the imposition of penalties. To argue there is no law in Christianity is to argue chaos wherein we stand for nothing and believe in anything. This is manifest nonsense. We are commanded by Scripture to define what is in and what is out else we are but a rag tag band of wanderers seeking who knows what. The church militant is imperfect to be sure, for it is composed of imperfect saints.

Paul wrote to Timothy that he should “follow the pattern of the sound words” (2 Tim. 1:13). Here pattern, ὑποτύπωσις, is “the form of sound words.” Every discipline has its own set of specialist words. The Apostle Paul does not simply say, “memorize the Old Testament.” These patterns include what was taught in 2 Thess. 2:15, “So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions [παράδοσις] that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.” Also 1 Cor. 11:2 “Now I commend you because you remember me in everything and maintain the traditions [παράδοσις] even as I delivered them to you.” See also 2 Thess. 3:6; 1 Cor. 11:23-26; 15:1-4.

If you want to argue the law (duty to God, duty to fellow man) delivered to Moses is abrogated, then do so. You have not. You cannot.

A person claiming to be a member of Our Lord's Bride who believes one can do or believe whatever he or she desires without consequence (penalties), is a very confused person.

For someone who argues as you do, the irony abounds. For, if one takes the time to assemble the basics of what you claim, one finds it replete with laws and rules, your rules, your laws, your way, or the highway.

Come down from the mountain, Robert, and tarry with us imperfect saints. Your face is not shining bright enough just yet. :AMR:

AMR

Christians are not under any laws, nor are they subject to laws. This probably sounds strange to you because you are religious. To live by the Holy Spirit is to live according to the Gospel. In the Gospel God sees me as perfect and complete "In Christ" Colossians 2:10.

You are religious, religious people are in the business of trying to perfect their flesh through the works of the law. I am not interested in your law based, fleshy religion, because I am already perfect and complete "in Christ". I am Spirit led and not law led. You probably won't understand any of this.

 

[Nanja]

Including pateism!

Sent from my LGMP260 using Tapatalk

Sure you right !

 

[fishrovmen]

Those that are religious live by law. They have a law based theology which makes them religious. The Pharisees said that the law was... "The way the truth and the life" John took what they said about the law and applied it to Jesus. Even though the dictionary has a different definition for these words they are still closely related when it comes to religion. Simply because the religious live by law. When one is doing their religion they are doing the law. Anything in the Bible that tells someone to do something or not to do something is law.

But you can't interchange/exchange what YOU perceive to be synonymous words into someone elses letters and make a doctrine or even a statement about that.
You are changing what the author intended. Paul could have easily included the word "threskias" in the text or he could have told us elsewhere that "threskias" and "nomou" are synonymous, but he didn't.
Do you not see the danger in inter/exchanging what anyone "perceives" to be synonyms into someone elses texts to come up with a new/ unintended meaning?
Do you not see how you have (by changing the meaning of the text) included yourself in your own definition of heretic (post #8)?

 

[Robert Pate]

Yes, but Paul did NOT use YOUR definition of religion. He used the word "threskeias" which has an agreeable, acceptable non-negotiable definition.
Do you agree?

Paul did use the word religion, Acts 26:5. Also Galatians 1:13,14. He used it to describe his life as a Pharisee and the Jews.

 

[clefty]

Christians are not under any laws, nor are they subject to laws. This probably sounds strange to you because you are religious. To live by the Holy Spirit is to live according to the Gospel. In the Gospel God sees me as perfect and complete "In Christ" Colossians 2:10.

You are religious, religious people are in the business of trying to perfect their flesh through the works of the law. I am not interested in your law based, fleshy religion, because I am already perfect and complete "in Christ". I am Spirit led and not law led. You probably won't understand any of this.

And the Spirit leads in accordance to what?

 

[fishrovmen]

Paul did use the word religion, Acts 26:5. Also Galatians 1:13,14. He used it to describe his life as a Pharisee and the Jews.

Did Paul speak English? Are we talking about the Apostle Paul who wrote the epistle to the Romans? Please read the post #79 again.

 

[Robert Pate]

But you can't interchange/exchange what YOU perceive to be synonymous words into someone elses letters and make a doctrine or even a statement about that.
You are changing what the author intended. Paul could have easily included the word "threskias" in the text or he could have told us elsewhere that "threskias" and "nomou" are synonymous, but he didn't.
Do you not see the danger in inter/exchanging what anyone "perceives" to be synonyms into someone elses texts to come up with a new/ unintended meaning?
Do you not see how you have (by changing the meaning of the text) included yourself in your own definition of heretic (post #8)?

Nevertheless, the words law and religion are related. Those that are religious have a law based theology, this is what makes them religious. You cannot separate the two words because they are related when it comes to religion. If you don't like being called religious stop living by law.

 

[Danoh]

All religions have evolved from Judaism, Judaism was a religion of law. The Pharisees practiced law keeping. Some of them even tithed down to the mint in their gardens, Matthew 23:23. This was their religion, was it not?

All organized churches have by laws. When you join an organized church you are required to abide by their by laws, are you not? If you don't abide by their laws they will kick you out. In the Catholic church it is called anathema.

If I joined your Presbyterian Church and started to teach against predestination would they not kick me out? Of course they would. Whatever church you belong to you must abide by their laws and their doctrines. This is the exact thing that Paul taught against. Being subject to laws, rules and ordinances, Colossians 2:20-22.

Your point about the Law and Religion basically meaning the same thing was valid.

But all you had to do was quote the Scripture - let it prove them wrong against your point.

Just a few examples showing your point is valid.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

An example of said judgment, mercy, and faith, being...

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Paul also agrees with your point - The Jew's Religion: The Law...

Galatians 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Philippians 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; 3:6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Romans 5:6-8.

 

[clefty]

Your point about the Law and Religion basically meaning the same thing was valid.

But all you had to do was quote the Scripture - let it prove them wrong against your point.

Just a few examples showing your point is valid.

Matthew 23:23 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone.

An example of said judgment, mercy, and faith, being...

James 1:1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.

1:27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Paul also agrees with your point - The Jew's Religion: The Law...

Galatians 1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: 1:14 And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

Philippians 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; 3:6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Romans 5:6-8.

Twisting scriptures as you do there is no need of Grace...as the Law is abolished...

No Law? What need of Grace?

It does explain the lawlessness of so many Christians...



If His Eternal Law could be removed you would think He would have done so before His Son had to die...

 

[fishrovmen]

Nevertheless, the words law and religion are related. Those that are religious have a law based theology, this is what makes them religious. You cannot separate the two words because they are related when it comes to religion. If you don't like being called religious stop living by law.

Nevertheless as in no big deal? Nevertheless as in it's better to change God's word than to be called "religious" where the word "religious" can have any old meaning?

 

[Robert Pate]

Nevertheless as in no big deal? Nevertheless as in it's better to change God's word than to be called "religious" where the word "religious" can have any old meaning?

If it is religion, it is of the law. If it is of the law, it is religion.

The worst part is that whether it be of the law or of religion it is under the judgment of God, Galatians 3:10.

 

[beloved57]

pate

Nevertheless, the words law and religion are related. Those that are religious have a law based theology, this is what makes them religious. You cannot separate the two words because they are related when it comes to religion. If you don't like being called religious stop living by law.

Like pateism, either do or die. Thats a law based principle that you cloak behind the Gospel of Gods Grace. Dont you teach that sinners Christ died for are lost until they do something ? And if they dont do it they are lost and condemned ? I know you teach that.

 

[Robert Pate]

pate



Like pateism, either do or die. Thats a law based principle that you cloak behind the Gospel of Gods Grace. Dont you teach that sinners Christ died for are lost until they do something ? And if they dont do it they are lost and condemned ? I know you teach that.

John 1:12. You need to receive him as your savior. John Calvin can't save you.

 

[Nanja]

John 1:12. You need to receive him as your savior. John Calvin can't save you.

Before a person has been made Spiritual in New Birth, his own receiving of Christ is merely a work of the flesh that cannot please God.


Rom. 8:8-9

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.

Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.


1 Cor. 2:14

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

 

[Robert Pate]

Before a person has been made Spiritual in New Birth, his own receiving of Christ is merely a work of the flesh that cannot please God.


Rom. 8:8-9

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you.

Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.


1 Cor. 2:14

But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Everyone that was saved in the New Testament were saved because they heard and believed the Gospel, Acts 2:41 also Acts 4:4.

The scripture says that..."Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God" (which is the Gospel) Romans 10:17.

You don't believe this. If you did you would not be a Calvinist. So you are the natural person that cannot receive the things of God, 2 Corinthians 2:14.

 

[Nanja]

Everyone that was saved in the New Testament were saved because they heard and believed the Gospel, Acts 2:41 also Acts 4:4.

The scripture says that..."Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God" (which is the Gospel) Romans 10:17.

You don't believe this. If you did you would not be a Calvinist. So you are the natural person that cannot receive the things of God, 2 Corinthians 2:14.

Pate is in error !

Before a person can hear the Gospel in order to believe/ have Faith they must first be "of God" / Born of the Spirit of God Gal. 5:22 to hear God's Words.

John 8:43, 47

43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.

47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

 

[Robert Pate]

Pate is in error !

Before a person can hear the Gospel in order to believe/ have Faith they must first be "of God" / Born of the Spirit of God Gal. 5:22 to hear God's Words.

John 8:43, 47

43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.

47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

Jesus was speaking to the unbelieving Pharisees. You cannot apply that to everyone.

On the day of Pentecost 8,000 heard and believed Peter's Gospel, Acts 2:41 also Acts 4:4.

Which proves that... "Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God (which is the Gospel) Romans 10:17.

No one is zapped with the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. You must hear and believe the Gospel.